Davis v. Norberg

Good Law
1990 Cal. App. LEXIS 356·219 Cal. App. 3d 663·268 Cal. Rptr. 384
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 12, 1990G006505California3,341 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sonenshine, J.

We here decide whether a probate administrator’s surety may participate in a probate proceeding as an interested person (Prob. Code, § 48) but without intervening (Code Civ. Proc., § 387). We conclude it may.

I.

John and Marilyn Davis owned Hedberg Manufacturing Company, which produced Clean Power, a fuel detergent. In November 1980, Hed berg entered into an exclusive distributorship contract with Tord Norberg’s company, Tegenor. When John died, Marilyn was appointed administrator and special administrator with powers to continue to run Hedberg.

At the time of John’s death, 90 percent of Clean Power was being distributed by Tegenor. The relationship soon deteriorated; Marilyn terminated the contract, and Norberg filed a $1,756,505 creditor’s claim, which Marilyn rejected.

Norberg responded by filing 18 objections to Marilyn’s final account and petition for final distribution. At the same time, he requested she be personally surcharged for the estate’s insolvency. He alleged she had breached her duty of care as estate administrator through negligence and mismanagement. The trial court disagreed and approved the final accounting. Norberg appeals.

II.

At the trial’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.